Lawmakers hear wide-ranging concerns on bill to allow vegetation work near utility lines

Tuesday’s joint hearing of the House Committee on Water & Land and the House Committee on Public Safety took up SB 11, a bill that would expand authority for vegetation management near electric utility lines and, in some cases, allow utilities broader access across private and state lands.

Supporters, including Hawaiian Electric, said the measure would help reduce wildfire risk where crews lack adequate easements or physical access. “We understand the community’s continued concerns about wildfire risk and believe this bill is a first step in addressing their concerns and creating a framework for moving forward,” said Wendy Oda of Hawaiian Electric.

The bill drew opposition or strong concerns from several testifiers. Michael Walker, statewide fire protection forester with the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), said the department “stands in strong opposition” because the proposal would “grant the rights to the benefits of the easement and place the responsibility and liability upon the state and private land owners for the easement.”

Farm and landowner groups pressed for protections for agricultural operations and question of compensation. “Maintaining vegetation to meet new requirements can be costly and labor intensive, especially for small-scale or family farms,” said Brian Miyamoto of the Hawaii Farm Bureau, noting possible crop damage, loss of windbreaks and the thin margins many agricultural operators face. Steve Tevis for Kamehameha Schools urged deferral and negotiation, saying many easements are decades old and uncompensated.

Private-land advocates also urged the committee to leave detailed vegetation-and-access rules to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). A representative of the PUC described an open docket reviewing Hawaiian Electric’s wildfire mitigation plan and said the commission plans a decision on that plan by September; the PUC also plans public meetings to take input. “That docket would be the appropriate venue for developing vegetation management rules,” the PUC representative said.

Utility witnesses told members the bill would help them reach lines where they lack recorded easements or physical access and that additional costs could be recovered through PUC rate proceedings. “Because this would require additional work…there’s clearance requirements in the bill that we would ask for some recovery for the additional cost,” Hawaiian Electric’s witness said when asked who would pay.

Public commenters and intervenors raised procedural concerns about the PUC docket, potential limits on public participation, and the complexity of applying a single statutory approach to many types of landowners and land-tenure situations. Henry Curtis of Life of the Land urged the PUC to lead the process and allow broader stakeholder intervention.

Committee members pressed for detail on which parcels lack easements, how often utilities must use helicopters for access and whether private renegotiation of easements is feasible. Utility and landowner witnesses agreed some easements could be renegotiated but said many are old, widely scattered and would be time-consuming to revisit.

The committee did not vote on SB 11 at this hearing. The joint chairs later announced SB 11 will be deferred to the committee’s Thursday morning agenda at 9 a.m.

The record of the hearing shows broad agreement on the goal of wildfire risk reduction but sharp disagreement on the proper legal vehicle, compensation and who should have primary authority to set technical standards or enforcement.